If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

No I disagree. they aren't as bad as you think. There aren't a lot of outstanding O lines out there.
Look at GB. Rodgers got killed all year. And don't even mention Chicago.
I think we tend to compare ourselves to other good teams. So in that context you are probably right. But league-wide, I think we are no worse than average.

No, league wide we still have a below average OL. Granted, Rodgers' OL was pretty horrendous last year, but part of the reason he gets killed so much more than Eli is that he tries to extend plays (seeing as he has the athletic ability to do so), instead of getting rid of the ball more quickly (such as Eli does, which inflates our OL's performance viz sack numbers).

Our line is exactly as bad as I think. As discussed with gmen8020 earlier, on a scale of 1-10, I have the line rated at a 4.2 (saying that Diehl starts at RT, and with Snee getting a 4 rating based on his last two seasons of play). That is below average. Our run blocking improved this year some, but our pass protection was still very poor. Eli may have only been the 14th most pressured QB, but that doesn't necessarily tell you how many times a lineman got beat and the pressure was cleaned up by an additional blocker before it could be counted as a pressure.

No, league wide we still have a below average OL. Granted, Rodgers' OL was pretty horrendous last year, but part of the reason he gets killed so much more than Eli is that he tries to extend plays (seeing as he has the athletic ability to do so), instead of getting rid of the ball more quickly (such as Eli does, which inflates our OL's performance viz sack numbers).

Our line is exactly as bad as I think. As discussed with gmen8020 earlier, on a scale of 1-10, I have the line rated at a 4.2 (saying that Diehl starts at RT, and with Snee getting a 4 rating based on his last two seasons of play). That is below average. Our run blocking improved this year some, but our pass protection was still very poor. Eli may have only been the 14th most pressured QB, but that doesn't necessarily tell you how many times a lineman got beat and the pressure was cleaned up by an additional blocker before it could be counted as a pressure.

I would say there is a 30% chance that DD is our starting RT. (barring injury) Still think we are drafting Fluker.
Just don't see us demanding that huge pay cut for DD if they see him as a starter.

They were a little hot/cold for my tastes across the season but I think that might be because Beatty didn't originally start and when Locklear went down, there was noticeable difference from the pass protection Diehl provided.

I would say there is a 30% chance that DD is our starting RT. (barring injury) Still think we are drafting Fluker.
Just don't see us demanding that huge pay cut for DD if they see him as a starter.

I have to ask MS: If JR passed on Glenn (another big OL prospect who offers more mobility and versatility than Fluker) for Wilson at 32, why would he take Fluker at 19? That value just doesn't add up to me personally.

I would say there is a 30% chance that DD is our starting RT. (barring injury) Still think we are drafting Fluker.
Just don't see us demanding that huge pay cut for DD if they see him as a starter.

Or we think Brewer is the answer, and he's a complete question mark. The signing of Boothe to a 1 year deal and Snee's 2014 year being voidable makes me think that if we draft OL in the 1st, we're going interior OL, not RT.

They were a little hot/cold for my tastes across the season but I think that might be because Beatty didn't originally start and when Locklear went down, there was noticeable difference from the pass protection Diehl provided.

I have to ask MS: If JR passed on Glenn (another big OL prospect who offers more mobility and versatility than Fluker) for Wilson at 32, why would he take Fluker at 19? That value just doesn't add up to me personally.

Because we don't just draft BPA. We cross BPA with team need (usually the following year's need) and positional value.

Or we think Brewer is the answer, and he's a complete question mark. The signing of Boothe to a 1 year deal and Snee's 2014 year being voidable makes me think that if we draft OL in the 1st, we're going interior OL, not RT.

Another possibility. Either way, can't see cutting DD's deal so much if they see him as the starting anything.

They were a little hot/cold for my tastes across the season but I think that might be because Beatty didn't originally start and when Locklear went down, there was noticeable difference from the pass protection Diehl provided.

I have to ask MS: If JR passed on Glenn (another big OL prospect who offers more mobility and versatility than Fluker) for Wilson at 32, why would he take Fluker at 19? That value just doesn't add up to me personally.

Because they went for need. (IMO) We had a broken down Bradshaw and not much else going into the draft last season.

Because we don't just draft BPA. We cross BPA with team need (usually the following year's need) and positional value.

That's a massive need reach though if we were to take Fluker at 19th overall. You're not getting as good of a guy in the mid 1st when you let a superior prospect pass last year into the early 2nd. That's not good drafting imo.

That's a massive need reach though if we were to take Fluker at 19th overall. You're not getting as good of a guy in the mid 1st when you let a superior prospect pass last year into the early 2nd. That's not good drafting imo.

You have a right to your opinion but I'm sure many teams have a 1st round grade on Fluker. Doesn't make them right but you and I both know he ain't making it to the second round.